Gandhi advocated for Indian Flag with Union Jack in corner while Savarkar advocated for Bhagva Flag in 1947

 

Gandhi advocated for Indian Flag with Union Jack in corner while Savarkar advocated for Bhagva Flag in 1947

Dr Vivek Arya 

  On 7 July, 1947 Savarkar sent a telegram to Ambedkar, Rajendra Prasad, Sardar Patel and N.B. Khare, expressing his views on how the flag of free India ought to be. The standard of Hindusthan must be,' he said ‘Bhagwa—Ochre coloured. At any rate, no flag, which does not bear at least a stripe of Bhagwa colour can be recognized by the Hindus as a standard they can respect. The Charkha too must be replaced by a Chakra wheel or any other such symbol signifying progress and strength.'

The Constituent Assembly was in fact deliberating among other things, the new flag of free India at that time. They had indeed reached a consensus to replace the spinning wheel of Gandhi with the Chakra, which was called as that of Emperor Ashoka. Savarkar clarified this too through a public statement on 29 July that the wheel was not a creation of Ashoka. According to him, it was a 'Dharma Chakra' that had been set in motion during Buddha's first sermon in Sarnath that later Ashoka adopted and it symbolized the valour of people like Chandragupta Maurya and Chanakya who drove foreign invaders away. But even after this, he struck an oddly strident and bitter note against the new tricolour:

Having thus noted impartially the good points in the new Flag adopted for the Indian Union, which render it much less objectionable, I must emphatically state it can never be recognized as the National Flag of Hindusthan. Firstly, because the state of Indian Union and the so-called Constituent Assembly are the creation of the British will and not of the free choice of our people ascertained by a national plebiscite and their ultimate sanction even today is the British bayonet and not the national consent or national strength. Secondly, the very mention of the Indian Union reminds us of the break-up of the Unity of India as a nation and a state, the vivisection of our Motherland, and the treacherous Congressite abetment of that crime. How can a genuine nationalist salute such a Flag adopted by such a party with no mandate from the nation as a national flag. No! The authoritative Flag of Hindusthan, our Motherland and Holyland, undivided and indivisible from the Indus to the Seas, can be no other than the Bhagva with the Kundalini and the Kripan inscribed on it to deliver expressly the message of the very Being of our Race! It is not made to order but it is self-evolved with the evolution of our National Being. It mirrors the whole panorama of our Hindu History, is actually

worshipped by millions on millions of llindus and is already flying from the summits of the Himalayas to the Southern Seas, Other Party Flags will be tolerated, some may even be respected in corresponding courtesy but Hindudom at any rate can lovally salute no other Flag but this panHindu Dhwaja, this Bhagva flag as its national standard."

Interestingly, Savarkar had company in his sense of disapproval of the new national tlag in his ideological opponent Gandhi. At a speech in a prayer meeting on 19 July 1947, Gandhi felt it would be good to have the British Union Jack too in a corner of the new Indian flag.

If harm has been done to us by the British, it has not been done by their tlag and we must also take note of the virtues of the British. They are voluntarily withdrawing from India, leaving power in our hands ... we are having Lord Mountbatten as our chief gate-keeper. So long he has been the servant of the British king. Now he is to be our servant. If while we employed him as our servant we also had the Union Jack in a corner of our flag, there would be no betrayal of India in this ... It pains me that the Congress leaders could not show this generosity. We would have thereby shown our friendship for the British. If I had the power that I once had I would have taken the people to task for it. After all, why should we give up our humanity. 

Gandhi was not too happy with the trademark charkha symbol being removed from the flag. Talking to Congress workers in Lahore on 6 August 1947, he said:

I must say that if the flag of the Indian Union will not contain the emblem of the charkha I will refuse to salute that Flag. You know the National Flag of India was first thought of by me and I cannot conceive of India's National Flag without the emblem of the charkha. We have, however, been told by Pandit Nehru and others that the sign of wheel or the chakra in the new National Flag symbolizes the charkha also. Some describe the wheel-mark as Sudarshan Chakra.

But he eventually made peace with it.

[Reproduced from Veer Savarkar by Vikram Sampath]

Why Hindu should vote en mass? What Savarkar says?

 

Why Hindu should vote en mass? What Savarkar says?

Savarkar warned the Hindus of NWFP in a statement on 3 September 1943 and asked them to vote decisively for the Hindu Mahasabha henceforth if they needed a strong political voice to protect their rights:

Moslems have learnt to vote solidly for the Moslem League [sic] not because it has any very well-disciplined organization or extensive membership or work to recommend it but only because the Moslems have been taught and trained from their very cradle that their first duty is to enable Islam to dominate even politically over the non-Islamic world. To them the Moslem cause is the only patriotic, the only national nay, the only human cause. That is why the Moslem electorate, almost instinctively, backs up the candidates of any Moslem organization whether it be the Khilafat movement or the League as soon as that body pledges itself to defend and promote even aggressively this innate ambition of the Moslems. The League has most uncompromisingly raised the standard of Pakistan and Moslem electorate backed it up by voting for it solidly and invested it with the unquestionable right of being the representative body of the vocal and powerful Moslem sections. But the Hindu electorate on the contrary has been subjected to the perverse and degenerating influence of the pseudo-nationalistic tenets of the Congress. Anybody or any organization that tries to advocate the Hindu cause is immediately dubbed as unpatriotic, something sinful and any one or any organization that plays ducks and drakes with even the legitimate Hindu rights or with Hindu honour is invested with humanitarian magnanimity and saintliness. Owing to this mentality the Hindu electorate continued to entrust their representation in the hands of that very body which stands openly pledged not to defend Hindu rights as Hindu rights, and publicly maintained that Nationalism' requires it to betray the Hindu rights. The result is that the Hindus are now hemmed in on all sides by anti-Hindu forces and Pakistan and the cursed principle of Provincial self-determination to secede which is worse than Pakistan—have now become life-issues. But if the Hindus even now learn the stem lesson which the determination of Moslem electorate to vote only for the most aggressive Moslem candidate implies and rally round the only organization which has been strenuously, faithfully and effectively advocating the Hindu cause then even now the Hindus would regain much that they have lost and find themselves in a dominant position in the political field. The Congress cannot and will not recognize itself as a Hindu body and cannot therefore advocate the special rights and interests of the Hindus. Nay, on the other hand the Congress is always bound to indulge in letting down the Hindu case if only to prove more emphatically its pseudo-nationalistic pretensions ... If today the Hindu cause is not defended or promoted as strongly and rapidly as it ought to have been it is only due to the suicidal mistake of the Hindu electorate in voting for this very Congress. Let the Hindu electorate try at least once to cast their votes for the Hindu Sangathanist candidates and it will immediately see that the Hindu Mahasabha and the Hindu Front in general grows a dozen times more in strength than the League or the Moslem Front as a whole.

[ Reproduced from Vikram Sampath book Veer Savarkar by Dr Vivek Arya]

Why Veer Sarvarkar asked Hindu Sabha leaders to join Muslim Majority Government in Sindh, Bengal, Punjab and NWFP?

 

Why Veer Sarvarkar asked Hindu Sabha leaders to join Muslim Majority Government in Sindh, Bengal, Punjab and NWFP?

Questions were therefore obviously being asked of Savarkar and his policy of ‘practical politics' to safeguard Hindu interests. However, Savarkar held on to his view. On 10 June 1943, he issued a lengthy statement justifying the Hindu presence in several Muslim-majority ministries, even if it meant allying with the Muslim League. He said that wherever an opportunity arises in a Muslim majority ministry, the Hindu members should capture positions of power and influence to better voice the concerns and legitimate rights of their community. Their presence would act as an effective bulwark against any possible anti-Hindu activities that the ministry might undertake, he believed.

But they (Hindu Ministers) should oppose publicly every attempt on the part of the Moslem Ministry to support Pakistan or the treacherous principle of Provincial self-determination to secede. The Provincial Hindu Sabhas should be left free on all other details to agitate against any anti-Hindu step on the part of the Ministry in its collective capacity and if the Hindu Ministers are known to have recorded their protest against such steps, they should not be asked to resign their seats on the Ministry. The leading principle which must be emphasized is that boycotting the Ministry altogether is bound to be more often than not highly detrimental to Hindu interest.

He prescribed a coalition model with the Muslims even in Hindu-majority states if and when such opportunities arise there, but with the fundamental idea of non-support of Pakistan and secession. Within the scope of these leading principles the formation of ministries and adjustment to the special circumstances prevailing in each province should be left to the discretion of the respective provincial Hindu Sabha.'

[Reproduced from Vikram Sampath book on Veer Savarkar by Dr Vivek Arya]

Savarkar on role of Britishers in Hindu Muslim divide

 Savarkar on role of Britishers in Hindu Muslim divide

Savarkar was one such commentator who called this spade a spade. In the 1939 Hindu Mahasabha address in Calcutta, he spoke about this:

It is also instructive and therefore, necessary to point out here that this theory of 'the third party' also constituted a Congress superstition which was responsible for so many of its errors. They always used to fancy that the Moslems, if left to themselves, would never have indulged in any anti-national, ulterior, anti-Hindu designs. The Moslems-including Messrs. Jinnah, [Fazal-ul] Huq [sic], and [Sikandar] Hayat Khan, were very simple-minded folk incapable of any political subterfuges and as devotes of Islam, peace and goodwill, had no aggressive political aims of their own against the Hindus. Nay, even the Frontier tribes, the brave brothers Moplas', the Moslem populations in Bengal or Sindh who indulge in such horrible outrages against Hindus have no taste for it all, nursed within themselves; but were almost compelled to rise and revolt against the Hindus by 'the third party' the Britishers [sic]. When the British did not step in we Hindus and Moslems lived together in perfect amity and brotherly concord and Hindu-Moslem riots was [sic] a thing simply unheard of. Thousands of Congressite Hindus are observed to have been duped in to this silliest of political superstitions. As if Mahamad Kasim, Gazanis, Ghoris, Allauddins, Aurangzebs were all instigated by the British, by this third party, to invade and lay waste Hindu India with a mad fanatical fury. As if the history of the last ten centuries of perpetual war between the Hindus and Moslems was an interpolation and a myth. As if the Alis or Mr. Jinnah or Sir Sikandar were mere school children to be spoiled with the offer of sugar pills by the British vagabonds in the class and persuaded to throw stones at the house of their neighbours. They say, 'before the British came, Hindu-Moslem riots were a thing unheard of. Yes, but because instead of riots, Hindus-Moslems wars was the order of the day.

Ref Savarkar A Contested Legacy vol two page 258 by Vikram Sampath

Ambedkar on number of Hindus in Indian Army

 

Ambedkar on number of Hindus in Indian Army

Dr Vivek Arya

Prior to India’s Independence and especially before World War II, the British Army was dominated by Muslims, who formed almost 50% of the force.High percentage of Muslims in Indian army was an alarming bell for thinkers like Ambedar. He states that the estimates that some people had was that the pre-war proportion of Muslims in the army was 60–70 per cent, while others pegged that number around 50 per cent. He goes on to state that even if one assumed it was the latter figure, 'it is high enough to cause alarm to the Hindus.

Elaborating further, Ambedkar writes clinically and bluntly:

The Indian Army today is predominantly Muslim in its composition ... the Musalmans who predominate are the Musalmans from the Punjab and the N.W.F.P. Such a composition of the Indian Army means that the Musalmans of the Punjab and the N.W.F.P. are made the sole defenders of India from foreign invasion. So patent has this fact become that the Musalmans of the Punjab and the N.W.F.P. are quite conscious of this proud position, which has been assigned to them by the British, for reasons best known to them. For, one often hears them say that they are the ‘gate-keepers’ of India. The Hindus must consider the problem of the defence of India in the light of this crucial fact. How far can the Hindus depend upon these ‘gate-keepers' to hold the gate and protect the liberty and freedom of India? The answer to this question must depend upon who comes to force the gate open. It is obvious that there are only two foreign countries, which are likely to force this gate from the NorthWest side of India, Russia or Afghanistan, the borders of both of which touch the border of India. Which of them will invade India and when, no one can say definitely. If the invasion came from Russia, it may hoped that these gate-keepers of India will be staunch and loyal enough to hold the gate and stop the invader. But suppose the Afghans singly or in combination with other Muslim states march on India, will these gate-keepers stop the invaders or will they open the gates and let them in? This is a question, which no Hindu can afford to ignore. This is a question on which every Hindu must feel assured, because it is the most crucial question ... Will they (the Muslim soldiers) respond to the call of the land of their birth or will they be swayed by the call of their religion, is the question, which must be faced if ultimate security is to be obtained. It is not safe to seek to escape from these annoying and discomforting be questions by believing that we need not worry about a foreign invasion so long as India is under the protection of the British. Such a complacent attitude is unforgivable to say the least.

Ambedkar's fears were shared even by British educationalist and member of the Council of India, who had served as the director of the University of London Institute in Paris, Theodore Morrison, whom he quotes as having said way back in 1899:

The views held by the Mahomedans (certainly the most aggressive and truculent of the peoples of India) are alone sufficient to prevent the establishment of an independent Indian Government. Were the Afghan to descend from the North upon an autonomous India, the Mahomedans, instead of uniting with the Sikhs and the Hindus to repel him, would be drawn by all the ties of kinship and religion to join his flag.

This view was raised on public platform by Veer Savarkar and mass drive was carried forward for Hindus to join the Indian Army and learn marial training and different warfare skills.

We all must thank the farsight vision of Ambedkar and Savarkar .In 1947 the Hindus soldiers were the biggest help to the Hindu refuges especially in NWFP, Sindh and Western punjab for their safe transport across the borders.

Veer Savarkar and Bhagat Singh

 

Veer Savarkar and Bhagat Singh

Dr. Vivek Arya

Communists are all the time spilling venom against Veer Savarkar and praising Bhagat Singh. They intentionally hides what was the relation between the two. How Bhagat Singh was inspired from Veer Savarkar writings and works? This article will throw light on this topic. When Bhagat Singh expired on 23rd March, 1931 it was a day of mourning for Savarkar.

Savarkar's house in Ratnagiri that always had the saffron flag atop it as a notable identifier had a black flag hoisted to grieve for the young brave hearts. Savarkar also composed a poem in honor of Bhagat Singh immediately after the news of his execution trickled out. The poem was sung in different parts of Maharashtra where tribute meetings for the martyr were held. Children in Ratnagiri also took out a procession singing this poem.

“Ha, Bhagat Singh, hi ha! You galloped on the gallows, oh hai for us! Rajguru, you ha! Veer Kumar, martyr in National warfare Hi ha! Jai Jai Ha! This ah of today will win tomorrow Royal crown will come home Wore you crown of death before that. We will take arms in our hands the ones with you were killing the enemy! Who is a sinner?

Who does not worship the unmatched sanctity of your intentions, Go, martyr! We take oath with testimony. The fight with arms is explosive, we are remaining behind you Will fight and win freedom!! Hi Bhagat Singh, Hi Ha!”

Four months later, Savarkar wrote another article in Shraddhanand,

reminding people of Bhagat Singh and his associates and their brave martyrdom. This was in line with the several articles that Savarkar routinely wrote in the Shraddhanand in support of revolutionaries. For instance, on 15 February 1930, he wrote a piece in support of the martyr of the Kakori case Ashfaqullah Khan titled "Janatecha Pyara Ashfaq' (The darling of the masses Ashfaq).

Savarkar and his works inspired revolutionaries across India. Bhagat Singh had the fourth edition of Savarkar’s book on 1857 secretly published in India. 46 There are references of how Bhagat Singh was deeply influenced by a small English biography of Savarkar that he read in the Dwarkadas Library of Lahore.47 Copies of the book were found in the course of the raids on all the members of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association (HSRA) who were accused in the Lahore Conspiracy case (1928–31), including Bhagat Singh. This fact is bolstered by a first-person account given by Durga Das Khanna in an interview in 1976.48 Khanna was the former chairman of the Punjab Legislative Council in independent India, but was a revolutionary in his youth days. He recalls his first meetings with Bhagat a Singh and Sukhdev. During their recruitment drive for the organization, they had met Khanna, spoken to him on politics and a wide range of issues to gauge his political orientation, and also suggested several books to read. These included Nikolai Bukharin and Evgenii Preobrazhensky's The ABC of Communism (1920), Daniel Breen's My Fight for Irish Freedom (1924) and Chitragupta's Life of Barrister Savarkar. It hence becomes clear that Bhagat Singh and his associates expected new recruits to the HSRA to not only read about the Russian Revolution and the Irish Republican Army, but also the life story of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar.

In fact, six quotes from Savarkar's book Hindu Pad Padashahi were noted down by Bhagat Singh in his own handwriting in his Jail Diary. The quotes are as follows:

1) Sacrifice was adorable only when it was directly or remotely but reasonably felt to be indispensable for success. But the sacrifice that does not ultimately lead to success is suicidal and therefore had no place in the tactics of Maratha warfare (Hindu Pad Padashahi, p. 256).

2) Fighting the Marathas is like fighting with the wind, is to strike on the water (Hindu Pad Padashahi, p. 254).

3) That remains the despair of our age, which has to write history without making it, to sing of valorous deeds without the daring abilities and opportunities without actualizing them in life (Hindu Pad Padashahi, pp. 244-45).

4) Political slavery can be easily overthrown at any time. But it is difficult to break the shackles of cultural domination (Hindu Pad Padashahi, pp. 242–43).

5) No freedom! whose smile we shall never resign. Go tell our invaders, the Danes, “That's sweeter to blood for an age at thy shrine. Than to sleep but a minute in chains!' (Hindu Pad Padashahi, p. 219, Savarkar quoting Thomas Moore.

6) “Rather get killed than converted.' This was the prevalent call among Hindus at that time. But Ramdas stood up and exclaimed, ‘No, not thus. Get killed rather than converted is good enough but better than that. Do not get either killed nor get violently converted. Rather, Kill the violent forces themselves and get killed while killing to conquer in the cause of righteousness' (Hindu Pad Padashahi, pp. 141–62)

An article titled “Vishwa Prem' published twice in the Matwala of 15 and 22 November 1926, Bhagat Singh had this to say about Savarkar and what he perceived as the latter's tender heart despite being a revolutionary: World-lover is the hero whom we do not hesitate a little to call a fierce insurgent, staunch anarchist—the same heroic Savarkar. Coming in the wave of world-love, he used to stop walking on the grass thinking that the soft grass would be mowed under the feet.”In March 1926, Bhagat Singh also wrote about Savarkar and his equation with his protégé in London, the martyr Madan Lal Dhingra:

The impact of the Swadeshi movement reached England as well and Mr. Savarkar opened a house called 'Indian House'. Madan Lal also became its member. ... One day, Mr. Savarkar and Madan Lal Dhingra were talking for a long time. In a test of daring to give up his life, Savarkar pierced a big needle in his hand by asking Madan Lal to lay his hands on the ground, but Punjabi Veer did not even say ah. Tears filled the eyes of both. The two hugged each other. Oh, how beautiful that time was. How invaluable and indelible that teardrop was! How beautiful that match was! So glorious! What should we know about that emotion, what cowardly people who are afraid of even the thought of death, know how high, how holy and how revered are those who die for the sake of the nation! From the next day, Dhingra did not go to the Indian House of Savarkar and attended the Indian students' meeting organized by Sir Curzon. Wylie. Seeing this, the boys of the Indian House got very agitated and started calling him even a traitor, but their anger was reduced by Savarkar saying that after all he had tried to even break his head to run our house. And due to his hard work, our movement is going on, so we should thank him! On July 1, 1909, there was a meeting at the Jahangir Hall of the Imperial Institute. Sir Curzon Wylie also went there. He was talking to two other people that was when Dhingra suddenly pulled out a pistol. He was put to sleep forever. Then after some struggle Dhingra was caught. What to say after that, there was a worldwide cry! Everyone started abusing Dhingra wholeheartedly. His father sent a telegram from Punjab and said that I refuse to accept such rebel, rebellious and murderous man as my son. The Indians held large meetings. There were big speeches. Big proposals moved. All in blasphemy! But even at that time Savarkar was the hero who favored him openly. At first, he offered an excuse for not letting the motion pass against him that he is still on trial and we cannot call him guilty. Finally, when the vote was taken on this proposal, the Speaker of the House, Mr. Bipin Chandra Pal, was saying that if it is deemed to be unanimously passed by everyone, then Savarkar Sahib stood up and started the lecture. Just then, an Englishman punched him in the mouth and said, “Look, how straight the English fist goes! A Hindustani young man put a stick on the head of the Englishman, and said, “See, how straight the Indian club goes! There was a noise. The meeting was left in between. The proposal remained unpassed. Well!

Quite evidently there was mutual admiration between these two revolutionaries—Bhagat Singh and Savarkar. An article published in Savarkar's Shraddhanand titled "The Real Meaning of Terror' was published by Bhagat Singh and colleagues in Kirti in May 1928. An article written by Savarkar expressing solidarity and support for Bhagat Singh and his companions was titled 'Armed but tyrannicaľ. A similar article on the name of the bomb's philosophy was published by Bhagat Singh's HSRA and Bhagwati Charan Vohra on 26 January 1930. The article was given final shape by Bhagat Singh in jail and was distributed across the country.

Now will the communists of our country accept this Truth that Bhagat Singh was inspired from the revolutionary writings of Veer Savarkar?

SAVARKAR AND BHASHA SHUDDHI

 

SAVARKAR AND BHASHA SHUDDHI

Dr Vivek Arya

One of Savarkar's important contributions to Marathi language during this time was the movement of Bhasha Shuddhi or language purification that he commenced. Though he had begun working on this since his incarceration in the Cellular Jail, his first article on the subject came up in the Kesari on 21 April 1925. It was the occasion of the birth centenary of Swami Dayanand Saraswati, the founder of the Arya Samaj. In another article on the same day, in the Mahratta, Savarkar urged the Hindu youth of Punjab to draw inspiration from Swamiji's life and avoid the usage of the Arabic script, but rather use Devanagari or Gurmukhi. It was shameful that in the year of Swamiji's centenary, Hindu poets and writers were writing their poems in an alien script, he argued.

The key elements of this 'language purification' project were as follows:

1. Resurrect the usage of old, Sanskritised words in all languages including the Dravidian languages.

2. Create a national corpus of such indigenous words from various languages and eschew the usage of words from foreign languages such as English, Arabic, Persian and Urdu. Create words for scientific terminologies in Sanskrit and Indian languages if they do not exist.

3. If those words from foreign languages that have crept into our linguistic usage because those objects did not hitherto exist in India (e.g. Coat, Suit, Jacket, Tennis etc.) then they can be co-opted into the national linguistic pool.

4. If the style and usage of any foreign language seems easy and interesting, there should be no objection to its adoption.

A significant part of his work on language purification consists of debunking claims of an indigenous or original language of the Muslim community. He documents the tussle between Arabic and Persian in the regions where Islam originated and how they kept fighting with one another for linguistic supremacy. Urdu for him was a language that grew from the intermixing of Muslim invaders into India and their Hindu slaves who spoke Hindi or Punjabi.Urdu was merely a distorted version of Hindi, according to him—this despite his proficiency in the language to compose patriotic ghazals in it during his incarceration in the Cellular Jail. He noted with alarm the increasing usage of Arabic and Persian words in north Indian languages and feared that in times to come these languages would completely dry out their indigenous vocabulary. The shuddhi that was propagated in religious reconversion to Hinduism was extended to linguistic purification too, to reclaim those original words and create a sense of cultural identity and ownership.

[Based on book Savarkar by Vikram Sampath]